We all want Detroit to be active on the trade market. I think a lot of the fan base is looking around the league right now at the names being floated and saying, “yes, Detroit should want them,” or “no, Detroit shouldn’t want them”. However, whether Detroit wants certain players or not doesn’t always come down to their want; sometimes it comes down to whether they can afford it. So, to keep things fair and keep bias out of this as much as possible, I’ve decided to put all the Red Wings roster players into my player value calculator and tier them based on how they score. Despite all that, I will still be tiering players as I feel best, and the formula will just be there briefly to give you a scope of how they compare to each other.
Formulas: They’re fair, simple, and have their flaws, but they do give you the general value. Simply, the value of the player is based on age, contract, production, defensive value, quality of competition, role, and availability. It doesn’t factor in trajectory as much; however, this is simply based strictly on value from last season. Essentially, the player gets a score in each of the mentioned categories, and it’s added together. Multiples are added to make the “score” scale fairly
Forwards:
((30 – Age) / 12 * 10) + ((3 – (Cap / 10)) * 5) + (PPG * 30) + (((CF – 50) / 2) + ((xGF60 – 2.0) / 2.0) * 12.5) + RoleScore + ((ThreeYearGP / ThreeYearPossibleGP) * 10) + ((3.0 – xGA60) / 3.0 * 30) + (((QoC + 0.30) / 0.9) * 10 + ((DZPercent – 50) / 50) * 5)
Defenceman:
((30 – Age) / 12 * 10) + ((3 – (Cap / 10)) * 5) + (PPG * 25 * 0.75) + ((((CF – 50) / 1.5) + ((xGF60 – 1.8) / 1.2) * 15) * 0.75) + RoleScore + ((ThreeYearGP / ThreeYearPossibleGP) * 10) + (((3.0 – xGA60) / 3.0) * 45 * 1.15) + ((((QoC + 0.30) / 0.9) * 7) + ((DZPercent – 50) / 50 * 3)) * 1.15
Untouchables:
Lucas Raymond (88.2): Detroit isn’t trading the best chance they’ve had at a true superstar since Zetterberg and Datsyuk. Not to mention, Raymond has one of the best contracts in the NHL. No reason he is even considered in trade talks.
Moritz Seider (84.0): A huge right-shot defenceman who can play the minutes Seider does isn’t something that should be considered on the trading block, period.
Dylan Larkin (80.7): No trade for Larkin would bring back the value he has to the team’s mentality. You don’t move your captain, especially when he’s been as solid as he has.
Alex DeBrincat (74.4): The formula doesn’t weight goals differently than assists, but if it did, you’d watch DeBrincat jump up the rankings. For his cap hit, drive, and role as an elite goal scorer, there is no reason to move DeBrincat.
Simon Edvinsson (71.0): Edvinsson, in his first full season, was incredible and seems like a staple on the blueline. Edvinsson gives the hope that he will become a true star very soon. The model ranks him low primarily because of his defensive metrics being caved in. Not really his fault, as playing elite competition as a rookie isn’t gonna look great.
Need a Great Offer:
Marco Kasper (73.1): Kasper proved to be huge for the Red Wings, he brought them a lot of the things they were clearly missing. If the formula considered physicality, Kasper’s already impressive rookie score would be even higher.
Patrick Kane (58.3): Despite the model not loving Kane, the value he brings to Detroit is a lot more than numbers suggest. His leadership, playmaking, and power play prowess are all very important. Not to mention, he was over a point per game under Todd McClellan. You likely won’t get fair value for Kane; Detroit needs him.
Trade Chips:
Elmer Soderblom (57.5): I’d imagine teams would be interested in Soderblom. You can always sell a GM on a massive frame who has a ton of skill and is cost-controlled. I could see Soderblom being a key piece in a deal for the Red Wings.
Albert Johansson (55.6): I am glad that his poor metrics didn’t burn him in the formula. Johansson is only going to get better after his rookie season. In a smaller role, Johansson will likely be a really steady player who can log solid defensive minutes and contribute on offense.
Mason Appleton (54.6): It would be weird to flip a guy you just signed, but Appleton is generally a solid bottom-six grinder that would be decent on all 32 teams. Not going to be a key piece, but certainly one you wouldn’t have a hard time moving if need be.
Erik Gustafsson (52.1): I do actually believe there are niche teams who might look at Gustafsson. His defensive work was quite poor, but he was playing with Justin Holl. Offensively, he looked like a decent power play quarterback. I do think a team that desperately needs an offensive defenceman on their team would have slight interest. He won’t get you a big return, but maybe a late-round pick for him would be possible.
James Van Riemsdyk (49.0): Possibly a deadline deal if something is going wrong. JVR is a great locker room guy who will provide decent offence and play an old-fashioned, screen-heavy game. His age and defense deter the model from rating him highly.
Michael Rasmussen (47.9): The model also doesn’t love Rasmussen, but the entire bottom six was pretty bad this year. At the end of the day, you can always sell a GM on size and skating, so I believe he has some value because of that.
Jonatan Berggren (47.6): Berggren’s value would come mostly as a reclamation project. There is still potential for Berggren, and the model doesn’t take into account that he was devoid of offensive help in the bottom six last season. It’s put up or shut up for Berggren, who has been rumoured to be a part of trade talks.
Better Off Keeping:
Ben Chiarot (51.2): Detroit has squeezed a gallon of blood from the Chiarot-stone. He was never a top-pair defender, and Detroit has forced him to be one. If he were put in a more fair role, his numbers would look great. However, if you deal with Chiarot, you need a top-four left defenceman back, something you won’t get for him. Chiarot means more to Detroit than Detroit means to Chiarot.
Andrew Copp (42.9): Similar to the point I made about Kane, the value you get in a trade for Copp won’t be as much as the value he brings to your team. He’s a gritty center who will kill penalties, but he’s overpaid and doesn’t do much on offense. If you get a good offer, you’re happy to take it, but truthfully, the contract doesn’t give Copp value to other teams.
Negative Asset:
J.T. Compher (47.8): The model favours Compher to Copp because of availability. It doesn’t factor in Compher’s awful finishing and faceoff percentages. Not to mention Compher is a lot softer than Copp. A really bad season from Compher.
Justin Holl (47.2): Again, he gets a half-decent score because his per/60 numbers look good. His sheltering is extreme, and even though that is factored in, it’s not enough to emphasize how bad Holl was. No team is taking on Holl, and after this Detroit contract, his time in the NHL might be up.
Extra Notes:
Draft picks also matter quite a bunch here. Depends on what you consider the value of a pick to be. Not to mention the average replacement player would be about 50.0. Think of VORP in baseball or basketball. So the value of a guy like Jason Robertson is his value + the average 50.0 replacement player who could take over for him. Obviously, the formula is far from perfect, but it’s just a general ballpark.
ITR 47: Then There Was Nothing – Inside The Rink
Discover more from Inside The Rink
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
